editingposts
开云体育Vickie - As Shal pointed out, that's exactly what what groups.io does with edits. They are sent out as new posts, with the ability for a reader to follow a link and go back and to what was changed. ? The alternative, to send out a new post without linking it to the original posts, leaves the original post with possibly erroneous information in the message archives where a person may read it and, not realizing it was corrected, assume it to be accurate. To delete the original post takes it out of any thread that it might be linked to and may affect whether the new reply even connects to the thread. ? Groups.io's method retains the corrections in the archives and holds the message's place in the thread. I can see muting the previous versions of a post?in the archives as long as the final revision stays in the same place in a thread. ? If your group only cares about what comes through email, then what's in the archives doesn't matter anyway, and the revised post will give you the new post you want. ? Dano ?
|
|
You are missing the whole point, of not wanting to deal with multiple edited emails.? Most edits are not done for erroneous info, but for spelling error or to add new info.? so there is no reason not to do a new post in the same thread if its important, and if its not, then it will be let go, which is what we want.? Ro with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &? Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond. From: dano@... Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:59:28 -0700 Vickie - As Shal pointed out, that's exactly what what groups.io does with edits. They are sent out as new posts, with the ability for a reader to follow a link and go back and to what was changed. ? The alternative, to send out a new post without linking it to the original posts, leaves the original post with possibly erroneous information in the message archives where a person may read it and, not realizing it was corrected, assume it to be accurate. To delete the original post takes it out of any thread that it might be linked to and may affect whether the new reply even connects to the thread. ? Groups.io's method retains the corrections in the archives and holds the message's place in the thread. I can see muting the previous versions of a post?in the archives as long as the final revision stays in the same place in a thread. ? If your group only cares about what comes through email, then what's in the archives doesn't matter anyway, and the revised post will give you the new post you want. ? Dano [excess quote trimmed by moderator] |
|
Ro,
You are missing the whole point, of not wanting to deal with multiplePlaying devil's advocate for a bit longer, why not put those members on individual moderation. Then you can reject their edits and tell them why. If they clean up their act you can take them back off moderation. That resolves the flood-of-trivial-edits problem, at least outside of the moderator pool, without removing the functionality for cases when it makes sense. (Yeah, I know, there I go again presuming that members of other people's groups can be trained.) so there is no reason not to do a new post in the same thread if itsWell, there is, as Dano pointed out: even if posted in the same thread the correcting message doesn't hide the erroneous information. Someone finding the original post wouldn't necessarily know that they should read down the thread to see if there is a correction later. But that has a much lower importance in a group which is primarily read by email, and the archive is not treated as a repository of knowledge. This points to my "One size does not fit all" mantra. I haven't experienced a group where most edits are trivial, but within such a group, I imagine the people doing the trivial edits are primarily reading by web, without an appreciation for how their edits impact the members that read via email. In its way this is comparable to the post-trimming conflict that crops up in some Y!Groups: members who read individual messages often don't appreciate the impact long trails of bottom quotes have on people trying to read by digest. The founder of Y!GMF, for example, wanted to solve that problem (and a host of others) by having a control which would allow him to disable posting by email in his groups. I, being primarily email oriented, have always been glad that Yahoo never saw fit to give him that option. -- Shal |
开云体育> Dano wrote:>>I can see muting the previous versions of a post >?in the archives as long as the final revision stays in the same >?place in a thread.<< > > By muting in the archives, do you mean not enabling the person >?viewing via web to see the previous versions? I wouldn't want that. > > Brenda ? The post in question would just be noted as edited. A user could dig back if they wanted, but a typical person reading the thread wouldn't be bothered by all the earlier duplicate posts with errors or misstatements. The final post shown would give the intended message. ? Then again, why would it matter in most cases? Just because someone missed an error in a message, why would someone else care what was initially written? That information would be wrong according to the sender anyway, which is why they'd correct it. ? Dano |
|
D R Stinson wrote:>>Then again, why would it matter in most cases? Just because someone missed an error in a message, why would someone else care what was initially written? That information would be wrong according to the sender anyway, which is why they'd correct it.<<
The main reason I can think of, would be if someone posted something bad or hurtful or mean to an individual in the group, and then edited it to make it seem like they hadn't done it. In my case, I would always know, because I collect & store every post in e-mail, but if the original post isn't viewable, then there would be no proof of the message originally sent if you didn't collect them like me. Hope that explains it. Brenda |
|
Brenda,
The main reason I can think of, would be if someone posted something badAs I pointed out to Louise, the Edit mechanism does the opposite of hiding what they did - it calls attention to it. /g/GroupManagersForum/message/230 -- Shal |
D R Stinson
Ro
Shal Farley
Nightowl >8#